Telangana High Court
Dornala Lingaiah vs The State Of Telangana on 23 December, 2024
Author: B. Vijaysen Reddy
Bench: B. Vijaysen Reddy
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN REDDY
WRIT PETITION No.36084 OF 2024
ORDER:
The writ petition is filed seeking to declare the action of the
respondents in opening the rowdy sheet against the petitioner,
without following due process of law, as being arbitrary and illegal.
2. Heard M/s. Mungi Saraswathi Reddy, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Mr. R. Laxmikanth Reddy, learned Assistant
Government Pleader for Home.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner is
involved in a solitary crime i.e., Crime No.258 of 2010 of
Nalgonda I Town Police Station, wherein, charge sheet has been
filed in P.R.C. No.17 of 2017 on the file of learned Judicial
Magistrate of First Class, Nalgonda, and later committed to learned
Principal Sessions Judge, Nalgonda, (for short ‘Trial Court’) in S.C.
No.191 of 2019. The said case was ended in acquittal vide judgment
dated 30.04.2020. On the basis of solitary crime, rowdy sheet was
opened against the petitioner. Thus, the action of respondents in
opening rowdy sheet against the petitioner is illegal and arbitrary.
2
4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, having
received written instructions from the Sub-Inspector of Police,
Chityal Police Station, submitted that petitioner was involved in
Crime No.258 of 2010 of Nalgonda I Town Police Station registered
under Sections 120B, 302, 201 and 109 of Indian Penal Code (IPC).
As the petitioner was involved in heinous crime, in order to curtail
his unlawful activities, rowdy sheet was opened against him in
respondent No.3 Police Station and later transferred to respondent
No.4 Police Station.
5. It is not in dispute that the petitioner was involved in solitary
crime i.e., 258 of 2010 which was ended in acquittal vide judgment
dated 30.04.2020. As per the decision of this Court in MAJID
BABU V. HOME SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF
ANDHRA PRADESH 1, in order to classify a person as a habitual
offender, he should be involved in more than two criminal cases.
Following the aforesaid judgment, this Court in Mansoor Shah
Khan v. State of Telangana (W.P.No.22980 of 2020 dated
01.06.2021), held that rowdy sheet cannot be opened against a
1
(1987) 2 ALT 904
3
person unless he is involved in more than two criminal cases. The
requirement of involvement in at least more than two cases for
inferring the petitioner herein as habitual offender is not established
in this case. Hence, the continuance of rowdy sheet against the
petitioner is unsustainable.
6. In view of the above, the writ petition is allowed.
The respondents are directed to forthwith close the rowdy sheet
opened against the petitioner. However, this order shall not preclude
the respondent authorities to open a rowdy sheet against the
petitioner, if the petitioner is involved in more than two (2) criminal
cases, by following due process of law and in accordance with the
conditions prescribed in the Order No.601 of the Telangana State
Police Manual (TSPM). There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous applications, if any,
pending in the writ petition stand closed.
______________________
B. VIJAYSEN REDDY, J
December 23, 2024
MS